" The Daily Dinar " ....Thursday, January 31, 2013
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: " The Daily Dinar " ....Thursday, January 31, 2013

  1. #1

    " The Daily Dinar " ....Thursday, January 31, 2013


    An agreement reached between Peshmerga and Federal government.
    31/01/2013 08:47:00

    Arbil / NINA / Peshmerga Ministry in the Kurdistan Regional Government announced that the High Joint Committee between the province and the federal government succeeded in reaching a solution on the disputed areas.

    Helkurd Hikmet, the Media Manager in the ministry said in a press statement that "The committee decided to continue to hold a regular weekly or monthly meetings ".

    He added: "The future meetings will focus on the agreement on the location of joint security stations, and the withdrawal of additional troops from the area and determine the border points."


  2. #2
    *** MORE STRONG LANGUAGE FROM YET ANOTHER MP ; "The issue of investigating Maliki in the parliament became useless," noting that "He must be dismissed as soon as possible."

    Maliki may release terrorists to keep on authority, says Mansouri
    Thursday, 31 January 2013 10:22 | | |

    Baghdad (AIN) –MP, Hussien al-Mansouri, of Ahrar bloc assured "The Premier, Nouri al-Maliki, started to present concessions for the demonstrators concerning important cases."

    He stated to All Iraq News Agency (AIN) "The issue of investigating Maliki in the parliament became useless," noting that "He must be dismissed as soon as possible."

    "Maliki started to behave improperly towards the country and this led Iraq to a critical stage so we must speed up the process to dismiss him," he added.

    "Maliki may release the terrorists as he released the women prisoner that he previously described them as terrorists," he concluded.

    Maliki approved involving all women detainees in a special amnesty.


  3. #3

    IKurdish MP urges to endorse laws that protect rights of provinces, monitor federal revenues
    Thursday, 31 January 2013 09:56 | | |

    Baghdad (AIN) –MP, Hameed Bafi, of the Kurdistani Alliance urged to endorse two laws one of them is to ensure protecting the rights of the regions and the provinces that do not belong to a region and the other is to monitor the federal revenues.

    In a statement received by AIN, he said "The constitution confirmed the Republic, Federal regime of Iraq that respects the diversity of all Iraqi communities without discrimination."

    He added "Among the rights emphasized by the constitution is to form a general committee to ensure the rights of the regions and the provinces that do not join a region," noting that "Another right is to establish another committee to monitor the federal revenues to sustains justice and to confront corruption."

    "The Federal Government is exploiting the huge revenues of oil that form 90% of the budget under the weak supervisory role of the parliament so I call the Government to speed up sending the drafts of two laws that concerned with forming the General Committee of protecting the Regions and Provinces' rights and the General Committee of monitoring the Federal Revenues," he concluded.


  4. #4

    "The Federal Court is very necessary to achieve stability in for the regime and justice in Iraq because it has the authority to reject the laws endorsed by the parliament and the to interpret the constitutional articles in addition to settling the disputes between the Federal Government and the local governments," he concluded.

    Bafi accuses Maliki of interfering in judicial authorities' performance
    Thursday, 31 January 2013 09:28 | | |

    Baghdad (AIN) –MP, Hameed Bafi, of the Kurdistani Democratic Party, headed by the President of Kurdistan Region, Masoud Barzani, accused the Premier, Nouri al-Maliki, of interfering in the performance of the judicial authorities.

    Speaking to All Iraqi News Agency (AIN), he said "There are many complains against the executive authority especially Maliki, who interfere in the judicial authorities and divested them from their duties and authorities," noting that "Such issue created concerns among the Iraqis and the politicians as well as the international community."

    "The State of Law Coalition stands against the public will to endorse the law of the Federal Court," he added.

    "The Federal Court is very necessary to achieve stability in for the regime and justice in Iraq because it has the authority to reject the laws endorsed by the parliament and the to interpret the constitutional articles in addition to settling the disputes between the Federal Government and the local governments," he concluded.


  5. #5
    Chuck Hagel, Iraq and Obama’s Easy-Listening Foreign Policy
    by Reidar Visser

    There has been no lack of critical voices regarding the nomination of Chuck Hagel as US defence secretary. Protests against the nomination range from accusations of homophobia to suggestions he is “soft” on Iran and lacks “commitment” to Israel.

    One argument against Hagel that is never going to be used in the hearings on Capitol Hill today but is nevertheless worth mentioning concerns his views on Iraq, particularly as expressed during the debate about the Bush policy of a “surge” of US forces in early 2007. Some will perhaps make use of these remarks to argue that Hagel was against the “successful” surge of US forces. Such a view exaggerates the significance of the surge as an independent factor behind the reasonable political climate that briefly prevailed in Iraq between April 2008 and April 2009, and is not really a meaningful argument against his candidacy. But there is another, deeper argument relating to Hagel’s epistemology of Iraqi politics that came to the fore in those heated debates in early 2007. In a Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting on 12 January 2007, Hagel contended that, “we are in a civil war. This is sectarian violence out of control, Iraqi on Iraqi. Worse, it is inter-sectarian [sic] violence, Shia killing Shia”.

    Hagel probably said, or meant to say, “intra-sectarian”. In any case, his point was very clear: There is supposedly a natural state of affairs in Iraqi politics, consisting of endless sectarian conflict. Sunnis killing Shiites would have been “natural” to Hagel. When Shiites began killing Shiites, it meant the situation was “worse”, unnatural and out of control.

    This little piece of simplistic Iraq epistemology may perhaps come across as innocuous to the majority of American commenters on Middle Eastern affairs. Indeed, there is nothing terribly unique in what Hagel says, even though he is pitching the message in a more clear-cut manner than most others. Many US analysts prefer to see Iraq as an eternal battleground of Shiites and Sunnis, supposedly going back many centuries in time.

    And today, of course, some will no doubt claim that the current situation in Iraq and the region proves Hagel was right in 2007. Aren’t Shiites fighting Sunnis more than ever, aren’t Sunnis demanding their own federal region in Iraq, and isn’t there even a clear-cut regional dimension with Turkey, the successor to the Ottoman Empire, sponsoring Iraqi and Syrian Sunnis and Iran, the successor to the Safavids, doing the same with regard to Iraqi Shiites and Syrian Alawites?

    The point is, though, that this situation today does not reflect a unilinear, steady deterioration of affairs in Iraq from the time Hagel made his statement in 2007 until today. Following that period, thanks both to the surge and the growing rejection by many Iraqi politicians of parts of the hastily crafted 2005 constitution, a more moderate political climate prevailed in 2008 and during the 2009 local elections. Crucially, after a sectarian climate had prevailed during the civil-war like conditions of 2006 and 2007, the atmosphere of Iraqi politics improved sufficiently during 2008 to encourage Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to run on a separate electoral ticket in the local elections in January 2009, quite despite the expressed desire for Iran to see greater Shiite sectarian unity.

    Prior to the parliamentary elections of 2010, Maliki tried the same thing. But when the new Obama administration initiated ouvertures to Iran in spring 2009, Iran reciprocated by asserting itself even more strongly in Iraqi politics, propelling de-Baathification to the top of the agenda and gradually aliki back to sectarian unity. Symptomatically, in the upcoming Iraq local elections on 20 April 2013, unlike in 2009, Maliki will run a big Shiite sectarian coalition in most provinces and all-Shiite coalitions in areas with Shiite minorities, entirely in accordance with Iranian preferences for unified Shiite fronts.

    The Obama administration, with numerous people sharing Hagel’s epistemology, probably even didn’t see that sectarian turn as a true anomaly. This of course is not to suggest that US influence in Iraq before 2009 was singularly virtuous or that the micro-managing of the Bush administration rested upon superior epistemological bases. But it did mean a multipolar environment for the Iraqi Shiites which has virtually disappeared during the Obama administration. Today, Iran seems to be the only game in town – and Obama seems to think that is a natural state of affairs.

    Perhaps Obama also sees some sort of potential in an Iran-dominated Iraq? It is very hard to avoid wondering whether the acquiescence in face of rising sectarianism actually constitutes something of a dangling carrot in front of Iraq, not unlike the Arab-press conspiracy theory of concessions to Iran in Iraq in exchange for a deal on the Iranian nuclear file. These days, American oil in Iraq, including Chevron where Hagel serves happens to serve on the board of directors, seems to be migrating northwards to the Kurdish areas that are under Turkish influence

    Obviously, rapprochement with Iran, with which Hagel is associated as part of a greater effort to disentangle the US from the Middle East, is in itself not a bad thing. But it should still be possible to criticize the precise nature of such movements. To use Iraq as a bargaining chip with Iran is simply just a lot more ahistorical than Obama realizes, and as a consequence, perhaps less sustainable over time. Historically, despite the cooperation between Iran and Iraqi Islamist parties since the 1980s, Iraqi Shiites have tended to resist Iranian domination. The difference is that whereas Hagel and friends posit sectarianism as an eternally dominant theme of Iraqi politics, Iraqi history shows a far more spasmodic pattern in which the significance of sectarianism has often receded in the absence of foreign intervention or regional instabilities. There was not much in the way of sectarian violence during the several centuries of Ottoman rule, or during the Iraqi monarchy period.

    Is it advisable to induce pan-Shiite tendencies in Iraq just for the sake of simplicity? So far, without moving on the nuclear issue, Iran has only taken the opportunity to strengthen its hold over Iraq and Syria. Approaching the Syrian crisis with Hagelian worldview, in turn, illustrates how the act of colouring whole areas and even countries sectarian inevitably means caving into the most radical sectarian forces in the region. Syria, in the eyes of Hagel, is presumably as “Sunni” as Iraq is “Shiite”. In this simplistic view, all Sunnis of Syria staunchly oppose Assad and only Alawites (and maybe Christians) support him. Of course, exactly like in Iraq, history is more complex. Anyone who knows Syrian history knows that “Sunni” Aleppo may well have different dynamics from “Sunni” Damascus. In fact, if Syrian politics could be reduced to a sectarian battle, Damascus would probably have fallen long time ago.

    It is simplistic approaches like those of Chuck Hagel that helps bring about a situation where the West is fighting Al-Qaeda in Mali and is tacitly supporting them in Syria. And Hagel will join an increasing number of people with several simplistic approaches to the Middle East in the Obama administration. Alongside Chuck “It Is Natural for Sunnis to Kill Shiites” Hagel at defence, we will have John “They Have Been Fighting Each Other for Centuries Kerry as foreign secretary, and Joe “My Guess Is It Will Be Three States” Biden as vice presidents. With policy-makers like these, there may be a whole lot of Benghazis to come.

    Reidar Visser | Thursday, 31 January 2013 5:38 at 05:38 | Categories: Sectarian master narrative, US policy in Iraq: Leverage issues | URL: http://wp.me/pBkdV-VX

  6. #6
    KA MP: Maliki's resignation, best settlement to current crisis
    Thursday, 31 January 2013 08:22 | | |

    Baghdad (AIN) –MP, Mahdi Haji, of the Kurdistani Alliance stated that the resignation of the Premier, Nouri al-Maliki, from his post is "The best settlement to the current crisis in Iraq."

    Speaking to All Iraqi News Agency (AIN), he said " Most of the political blocs including the Iraqiya Slate, the KA and some parts of the INA, stress the necessity of Maliki's resignation and forming new government that is able to settle the crises in Iraq."

    "The political scene needs Maliki's resignation because he did not respond to the public demands and failed in uniting the Iraqi people, but he increased the crises in order to cover the failure of the government and wasting a lot of money," he added.

    "By Maliki's resignation we will be able to bring Iraq back to its normal condition by adhering to the constitution and the former deals, especially Erbil agreement," he concluded.


  7. #7
    Al-Maliki agrees to request pardon for detainees

    Baghdad-street- Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Tuesday, a Commission initiative clan formed Iraqi tribes on the country's crisis, with Al-Maliki's approval on the Committee ordered a special amnesty to release all prisoners without exception.

    Al-Maliki said in a statement released today, after receiving the official library of the members of the Committee, and the news agency receives public opinion (Street) "that the Government had concrete actions for the implementation of the legitimate demands of the demonstrators." The committees will continue to work to achieve these demands. "

    Maliki welcomed the "tribal initiative Committee." Stressing the need for concerted efforts to save the unity of Iraq and its security and stability. "

    But the Commission spokesman said at a press conference "we met today with the Prime Minister and talked to him about all the things that would make legitimate demands." The Government confirmed its response to legitimate requests as guaranteed by the Constitution, it was agreed that the Committee would supervise or coordinate with all committees regarding applications for protesters. "

    On the issue of detainees said "we got the consent of the Prime Minister to request a special amnesty is served by the competent Committee to release all without exception." Calling all female detainees in Iraq to apply for pardon ".

    "The Prime Minister will also facilitate the task of this Commission with investigative services to contribute to the implementation of the present resolution, together with the discontinuation of all arrest warrants for secret detective until legislation of a special law.

    Either on the amendment of laws, the spokesman said "we have agreed with the Prime Minister to amend laws and approved, with the adoption of the amnesty after to ensure all the rights of other parties." p/h


  8. #8
    MP rules out dividing Iraq due to current political crisis
    Thursday, 31 January 2013 14:19 | | |

    Baghdad (AIN) –MP, Abdul Mahdi al-Khafaji, of the State of Law Coalition ruled out dividing Iraq due to the current political crisis.

    Speaking to All Iraqi News Agency (AIN), he said "The reports over Arab Spring in Iraq are not true because the political situation in the country is different since the Government is formed by people and they can replace it through elections."

    "We hope Iraq to be united where activating the non-central administration could avoid dividing Iraq at the current time," he added.

    "It is not easy to achieve confidence among the political leaders due to the consequences of the stances that they had in the last ten years," he concluded.


  9. #9
    The New Kid at Davos
    31/01/2013 06:59:00By DAVID ROMANO

    This year the Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq (KRG) attended the World Economic Forum meeting at Davos, Switzerland. KRG President Barzani met with other world leaders and business elites, discussed the crisis in Syria, oil production in the KRG region, trade initiatives and other topics of the day. The KRG leader was, in other words, received much like a head of state. The Kurdistan Region, by implication, received a welcome of the sort usually reserved for independent states. The KRG also apparently received assurances that it would be invited to Davos henceforward, every year.

    The KRG’s presence at Davos represents the latest in a clear and consistent strategy of ‘paradiplomacy,’ and perhaps ‘protodiplomacy’ as well. ‘Paradiplomacy’ refers to the foreign relations of regions, provinces or similar sub-state entities. Normally only sovereign states are supposed to conduct foreign policy and pursue diplomatic relations with other states. Iraq’s 2005 Constitution reserves this right for the central government in Baghdad, for instance. In reality, however, an array of sub-state units pursue their own foreign relations: Besides Taiwan, which is a bit of a special case, Quebec, Flanders, Wallonia, Scotland, Wales, northern Cyprus, various states of the United States, Somaliland, different German cities and others all pursue their own policies internationally. Many even maintain representation offices in the United States, France and a host of other countries. When these sub-state entities engage in paradiplomacy aimed at preparing the ground for and securing international recognition of a future declaration of independent statehood, we call it ‘protodiplomacy.’

    KRG officials will not, of course, admit to engaging in protodiplomacy. Whereas many states can tolerate paradiplomacy from some of their regions, protodiplomacy amounts to secessionist treason for them. Promoting a region’s tourism, culture and international profile for investment and trade remains permissible, but signing trade deals independently of the central government, securing weapons from abroad, making military alliances and sounding out other countries for their receptiveness to a declaration of independence provokes tensions with the central government.

    Given the state of the Iraqi political system, it makes good sense for KRG leaders to openly pursue paradiplomacy and discreetly engage in some protodiplomacy as well. Nuri al-Maliki’s government in Baghdad has shown itself willing to ignore Iraq’s constitution on a number of matters, and there’s no guarantee that the country will survive as a democracy. Given their difficult history in Iraq, the Kurds understandably need to keep a “Plan B” close at hand should authoritarianism in Baghdad threaten to swallow them up again.

    Many Kurds, from diaspora nationalists to revolutionaries of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), nonetheless criticize KRG leaders for their cautious strategy. Nationalists would like to see a forceful move to take disputed territories in Iraq and statehood declared sooner rather than later (if at all), while ‘revolutionaries’ fault the KRG for buying into capitalism and the American-led international order. Yet the KRG’s strategy has proven remarkably successful so far. Everyday in forums such as Davos, the KRG demonstrates to the world that it can trust and do business with Iraqi Kurdistan. Massoud Barzani and other KRG diplomats receive a warm official welcome in capitols across the world, from the Americas to Europe and Asia. Fears that Iraqi Kurds would destabilize the region and meddle in the “Kurdish problems” of neighbouring states never materialized. Even when it comes to the Syrian maelstrom, Turkey and Iran meddle much more than Iraqi Kurdistan. Ankara, the once implacable enemy of the Kurds, increasingly positions itself as an ally and the main investor in Kurdistan. Consulates of some twenty states have opened in Erbil. While Baghdad comes to be increasingly viewed as a maze of bureaucracy that no one can do business with, or Iran’s proxy and hence a member of the “rogue state” camp, Iraqi Kurdistan remains open for business, tourism and strategic partnerships.

    In the end, the more the world gets used to the KRG as a ‘safe’ international player, the less trouble it will have accepting a new Kurdish state should Iraq implode. The more money the international community has invested in Iraqi Kurdistan, the more they will stand up to defend it.

    * David Romano has been a Rudaw columnist since August 2010. He is the Thomas G. Strong Professor of Middle East Politics at Missouri State University and author of The Kurdish Nationalist Movement (2006, Cambridge University Press).


  10. #10
    Iranian Kurdish Leader: We Are Stronger, While Tehran Regime in Collapsing
    31/01/2013 07:42:00By WLADIMIR van WILGENBURG

    غThe Iranian government cannot destroy us, and we can also not destroy the Iranian army,” said PJAK leader Haji Ahmadi.

    ERBIL, Kurdistan Region – The Iranian Kurdish rebel group Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK) says that it is much stronger since a 2011 ceasefire with the government, while the Tehran regime is collapsing under international sanctions.

    “We fight for a peaceful solution of the Kurdish question. We have shown our power. The Iranian government cannot destroy us, and we can also not destroy the Iranian army,” said PJAK leader Haji Ahmadi.

    He said that the Iranians continue to arrest or execute Kurds because they are afraid of the different ethnic groups in Iran.

    “In the beginning, only the Kurds in Iran wanted their rights, but now all the people in Iran want their rights,” he added.

    Ahmadi said that international sanctions are biting hard on Iran’s rulers. “There is nothing that can stop the destruction of the Iranian regime, either economically, politically, or internationally,” he added.

    “We hear Iranian politicians say that the embargo can’t stop Iran. But now they are ready for many compromises. Their only wish is that the embargo is ended. The international community knows this,” according to Ahmadi.

    He questioned the cooperation between rival Kurdish parties from Iran who are based in Iraqi Kurdistan. “What can these banned parties achieve when they are not inside the country? It’s like, if three Kurdish parties in Europe unite. What can they accomplish”

    The PJAK-leader said he believed that, currently the Europeans and Americans do not want any change in Iran because they are preoccupied with the uprising in Syria against President Bashar al-Assad. “When Assad is defeated, it’s the turn of Iran. Therefore, Iran supports Bashar al-Assad with everything,” he said.

    Commenting on the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, Ahmadi said, “I don’t think the Muslim Brotherhood would be better for Kurds than Assad. I think they would be even more dangerous.”

    “Kurds want a democratic Syria and equal rights in all the countries (where they live),” he said.

    He told Rudaw that if Assad falls, the Iranian government will fall too.

    About the assassination of three female members of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in Paris earlier this month, Ahmadi speculated that Turkish ultranationalists most likely played a role in the killings.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts